This email highlights one of my pet peeves about some open source licenses. The word "modifications" has legal significance under copyright law. It is one example of what is considered a "derivative work."
A "derivative work" is a work based upon one or more preexisting works, such as a translation, musical arrangement, dramatization, fictionalization, motion picture version, sound recording, art reproduction, abridgment, condensation, or any other form in which a work may be recast, transformed, or adapted. A work consisting of editorial revisions, annotations, elaborations, or other modifications which, as a whole, represent an original work of authorship, is a "derivative work". 17 U.S.C. §101. Another example of a derivative work listed in the statute is "translation." I believe that lawyers should say "derivative work" when they mean both a modification and a translation. Otherwise the license is ambiguous. /Larry Rosen > -----Original Message----- > From: Kenny Tilton [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Friday, December 07, 2001 1:28 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Does "modification" include translation to another HLL? > > > The open source licenses I have looked at cover "modifications to the > software". > > Now suppose I have developed a useful hack in language X, which could > readily be translated into language Z. Can someone else make that > translation and claim ownwership of that software? > > I am thinking that "modification" might include translation, or that I > would have to explicitly mention translation in a license--but would > that then hold up? > > thx, > > ken tilton > clinisys > -- > license-discuss archive is at http://crynwr.com/cgi-bin/ezmlm-cgi?3 > -- license-discuss archive is at http://crynwr.com/cgi-bin/ezmlm-cgi?3
